If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Okay, I see your point. I always felt like the "Big Daddies" were a Big Joke anyway, never actually finding them threatening. (That could have been a lack of immersion issue, too.) The Big Sisters make sense if it's the matured little sisters mimicking the creatures whom they were once imprinted on. In that case, it doesn't even really need to be logical, it just needs to be "cool".

Yeah, I suppose that variant would make sense. I'd still see it as a forced tie-in, but it would, at least, have consistency in the game world.

Well to be honest, if they do it right(and they won't) Big Sisters could be scary. Instead of loud, lumbering Kool-Aid Men, they could be very silent and very quick spider-splicer-like.
Seeing a little sister alone, walking towards her and then having Big Sister drop right in front of you from the ceiling(or whatever) would work the first two times.

One of the things they got very right in the first game (at least IMO) is in evoking the pathos of the Big Daddies. I read lots of reviews, blogs and posts that noted how they felt much more sympathy for the BDs than for the freaky Little Sisters, and that killing them (or not) felt more meaningful than the somewhat artificial Moral Decision(tm) with respect to the LSs.

I would hope that they can get some of the same effect with the Big Sisters. If they're just creepy and scary but never become anything more than enemies/obstacles, they're missing a trick. If they can make them disturbing - for instance in the way that the Midwives in System Shock 2 were disturbing (before they were Reboobed) - and potentially moving at the same time, that'd be quite cool.

I too felt bad when killing the BDs. I always saved the LSs anyway and if I could have disabled the BDs I would have.

Anyways, the only reason I'm remotely interested in this is because Jordan is the lead. The original was overhyped trash that excelled in a few areas, making its failure all the more bitter. Sadly the plot of BS1 ended so badly that redeeming is going to be one hell of a hurdle.

IMO Bioshock had amazing moments (some of the best in the last 5-10 years) but these didn't come together to form an amazing overall experience. Having played it fairly late, I was glad in that I knew not to expect a coherent whole, so I was more able to enjoy the brilliant moments for what they were.

Anyway - my main wish for the sequel would be a feasible stealth mechanism. Anything that will let me play the game at the pace I enjoy most: slow and deliberate. Several of the great setpieces in Bioshock failed to some extent because the pacing was so frenetic.

Anyway - my main wish for the sequel would be a feasible stealth mechanism.

QFT! I haven't finished the game because of what struck me as dull, sterile gameplay. The setting/atmosphere is enthralling for me, despite managing to shoot itself in the foot sometimes, but the way it plays kills it for me as I get bored quickly. A little stealth would go a long way. Wouldn't need to be on the level of Thief, even something like in Fallout 3, linked to a single Gene Tonic line, would work.

According to forum posters, Bioshock 2 takes place 7 years after the original game, with protagonist Jack Abbott chasing the Big Sister who kidnapped his daughter all the way to Rapture. I say the Big Sister, as there is reportedly only one in the game, who acts as the mastermind behind the plot of the game. Rapture has been flooded, opening new areas while changing the dynamics of previous levels, with a fully explorable zoo and underwater exploration levels. They also make a big deal about a fight with a giant squid boss [...]

They also mention the already old No Big Daddies hat, and the possibility of a co-op play mode. The plot premise has some credibility, I think, given the new photo on the teaser site with "Sea creature stealing children on New Jersey coast".

I guess Big Sister is evil, and you have to beat her to get the Little Sisters, and you can either let them harvest Adam for you which probably will involve a lot of scripted enemy attacks(during which the normally invincible LS will be very much killable) or just harvest her and be on your merry way.

also, anyone else feels like re-playing bioshock from the perspective of a big daddy just sounds like a horrible, horrible idea? It worked for HL and OpFor, but here it just seems so... dull. Especially considering you already played as a big daddy in the first BS.

At first I was hoping that they did the little cell-phone pics of the article and then made up totally bogus information about it, but what you see in those pictures hits far too close to what's described. This sounds like some stupid 2-hour let's-sell-it-for-$15 DLC. I had figured that Bio2 would be an amusing romp that was at least as entertaining as BioS, but now I just want it to go away.

There's a big difference between tacking a new mechanic onto a game and designing the entire game around it. I can't really talk, because I haven't played that section, but I find it hard to believe that the things you all hate about it are really relevant to Bioshock 2.

Anyway, if that's all true, it sounds ... unusual. I don't know if I think it is likely to be a better game after hearing this, but at least I am more interested in seeing how the game turns out.

Of course, the optimist in anyone would say "let's give them credit guys, there's gotta be more to it than what we're seeing in this first glimpse", however the pessimistic cynic who played BioShock says that the first glimpses of BioShock (both in print and in game form) were the most exciting and everything gave way to disappointment after that, so their credit line is subject to intense scrutiny in the face of the global financial crisis.